Am I the only one that still gives credit to dopers achievements?

If fans want dopers and freak shows why do sports have the pretense of doping control? If it's really for the safety of their athletes why aren't the procedures and punishments more stringent? Why aren't players' unions demanding more stringent testing and more severe punishments? The pretense of a clean sport matters.

HRE wrote:

t's very clear that fans want the sports they watch to be clean, natural, etc.

HRE wrote:

I like clean, natural sports. You don't.

I don't want to be constantly invaded and bombarded with drug BS and nonsense.

Another clueless poster wrote:

Where do you get the idea that I don't like clean, natural, sports and want to be bombarded with drug BS and nonsense?

Because you want to make drugs the most important criteria.

We no longer can appreciate good performances, because some stupid idiot losers keep talking about drugs.

Then why the pretense wrote:

If fans want dopers and freak shows why do sports have the pretense of doping control? If it's really for the safety of their athletes why aren't the procedures and punishments more stringent? Why aren't players' unions demanding more stringent testing and more severe punishments? The pretense of a clean sport matters.

Drug testing was started by, and continues to be controlled by Big Pharma.

They do this to give the impression their drugs turn average people into super athletes.

They don't care if the sport is destroyed, as long as they keep selling more and more drugs at high prices.

The only way to STOP the problem, is to stop giving them all the power to decide who competes and who doesn't.

When drugs don't matter anymore, they won't matter anymore.

Then why the pretense wrote:

If fans want dopers and freak shows why do sports have the pretense of doping control? If it's really for the safety of their athletes why aren't the procedures and punishments more stringent? Why aren't players' unions demanding more stringent testing and more severe punishments? The pretense of a clean sport matters.

Why do you think it’s for the viewers?

When every other sport is about being bigger, faster, stronger.

You think the most important criterion for an athletics fan is cleanliness?

They want to see WRs, sub 2 marathons, 9 second 100m, men dressed as women winning gold medals.

Viewers want entertainment. And drugs are entertaining.

You are likely a purist, but the rest of the world isn’t.

Another clueless poster wrote:

HRE wrote:

t's very clear that fans want the sports they watch to be clean, natural, etc.

HRE wrote:

I like clean, natural sports. You don't.

I don't want to be constantly invaded and bombarded with drug BS and nonsense.

Another clueless poster wrote:

Where do you get the idea that I don't like clean, natural, sports and want to be bombarded with drug BS and nonsense?

Because you want to make drugs the most important criteria.

We no longer can appreciate good performances, because some stupid idiot losers keep talking about drugs.

We often no longer appreciate good performances because we cannot know how good those performances really are in many cases. Most of us would not consider drug aided performances as clean and natural. Evidently you do which is your business. I'll go back to Barry Bonds. He was a very good hitter. How does he compare as a home run hitter to Ruth or Aaron? Who knows? But I cannot appreciate his "good" performance as a power hitter.

I see that I screwed up the quotes.

That's because drugs are MORE IMPORTANT to you.

That's the whole point. People like you with the drug mentality are destroying athletics.

I never use drugs, and so they don't mean anything to me. Zero. Zilch.

But it's really annoying that every time someone runs really well, that some idiot has to accuse them of being on drugs.

That seriously destroys athletics for people like me, the people who really care about runners and athletics.

Why would someone else's reaction to a performance affect your enjoyment of a performance you like? If someone runs a 3:40 mile why would having someone else question the legitimacy of the time bother you?

HRE wrote:

Why would someone else's reaction to a performance affect your enjoyment of a performance you like? If someone runs a 3:40 mile why would having someone else question the legitimacy of the time bother you?

Do you have a daughter?

What if it was your daughter being trashed?

Perhaps because I have empathy and respect for other people, that the accusers and losers don't have.

Attacking and accusing people who train hard and do well is extremely offensive.

Holy crap LoneStar XC really believes that EPO took a guy from 30:XX to 27:30 in the 10k ?.

I already have trouble taking seriously most of what she (?) posts, but this seals the deal.

Another clueless poster wrote:

HRE wrote:

Why would someone else's reaction to a performance affect your enjoyment of a performance you like? If someone runs a 3:40 mile why would having someone else question the legitimacy of the time bother you?

Do you have a daughter?

What if it was your daughter being trashed?

Perhaps because I have empathy and respect for other people, that the accusers and losers don't have.

Attacking and accusing people who train hard and do well is extremely offensive.

What if your daughter is competing in a sport in which 1 in 3 - or even 1 in 2 - elite or professional athletes is doping, as estimates suggest? Does she get a pass because she's your daughter? Every doper is someone's son or daughter. If you're at the top of this sport there's a very good chance you're one of them.

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

Holy crap LoneStar XC really believes that EPO took a guy from 30:XX to 27:30 in the 10k ?.

Nah...couldn't have been rocket fuel - must have been box jumps, spikes, aerodynamic running shorts and YMMV's Keto diet. ?

Armstronglivs wrote:

Every doper is someone's son or daughter. If you're at the top of this sport there's a very good chance you're one of them.

You're one of the biggest doper believer / users on this web site so I'm sure you know all about using them.

CutSomeSlack4764588 wrote:

For example, as far as I’m concerned Lance Armstrong still rode his bike across the finish line first on multiple occasions in the most brutal bike race in the world. That is an achievement even doped to the gills.

An ill gotten achievement had at the expense of others who played by the rules. (not just other athletes, it's fans, admires, sponsors etc..)

It's dishonest, unfair, deceitful, trickery, duping, bilking, beguiling, and scamming just to name a few.

Cheating out weighs the accomplishment big-time, not even close.

Hard to celebrate a cheaters accomplishments without ignoring the damage the athlete caused by conning the system.

Why do you only ask about a daughter? Do you have a daughter who is being trashed for being a doper? No, I have sons. If they're being trashed for doing something trashable I'd likely be trashing them as well. If they were being unjustly trashed of course I wouldn't like it.

But you know what I'd like a whole lot less? Having them forced to choose between taking drugs that have potential harmful consequences for their health, that could get them suspended from competition if caught, or giving competitors a significant and illegal advantage over them. if they refuse to use those drugs as well.

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

Holy crap LoneStar XC really believes that EPO took a guy from 30:XX to 27:30 in the 10k ?.

I already have trouble taking seriously most of what she (?) posts, but this seals the deal.

World record in the 10000 before EPO was invented, low 27 minutes. Now it is low 26 minutes. Now for a 30 minute 10k runner, that would take more than a minute off the time.

You are assuming clean athletes are actually clean.

Alan

Then why the pretense wrote:

If fans want dopers and freak shows why do sports have the pretense of doping control? If it's really for the safety of their athletes why aren't the procedures and punishments more stringent? Why aren't players' unions demanding more stringent testing and more severe punishments? The pretense of a clean sport matters.

Fans want the appearance of fair play and clean sports while also wanting highlight real plays and records.

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

Then why the pretense wrote:

If fans want dopers and freak shows why do sports have the pretense of doping control? If it's really for the safety of their athletes why aren't the procedures and punishments more stringent? Why aren't players' unions demanding more stringent testing and more severe punishments? The pretense of a clean sport matters.

Fans want the appearance of fair play and clean sports while also wanting highlight real plays and records.

Alan

Bingo !!!!!!

You would know ~~ wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Every doper is someone's son or daughter. If you're at the top of this sport there's a very good chance you're one of them.

You're one of the biggest doper believer / users on this web site so I'm sure you know all about using them.

So anyone who's anti-doping has to be a doper? Cabbage for brains.